You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Land of the Free
Ketanji Brown Jackson ‘concerned' First Amendment is ‘hamstringing' government from censorship
2024-03-19
[Washington Examiner] Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson raised concerns that the First Amendment may stand in the way of government censorship in unique times.
She’s asking the questions that wouldn’t occur to anyone else.
In Monday’s oral arguments for Murthy v. Missouri, Jackson appeared to be skeptical that the government could not censor social media posts in "the most important time periods."

"My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways in the most important time periods," Jackson said to Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga.

"You seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information," Jackson said. "So, can you help me? Because I’m really worried about that because you’ve got the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances, from the government’s perspective, and you’re saying that the government can’t interact with the source of those problems."

Aguiñaga said his view was that the government should intervene in certain situations, but it has to do so by following the First Amendment.

"Our position is not that the government can’t interact with the platforms there. They can and they should in certain circumstances like that, that present such dangerous issues for society and especially young people," Aguiñaga said in response. "But the way they do that has to be in compliance with the First Amendment. And I think that means they can give them all the true information that the platform needs and ask to amplify that."
Related:
Ketanji Brown Jackson: 2024-03-04 Supreme Court Rules on Trump's Ballot Eligibility
Ketanji Brown Jackson: 2024-01-23 Supreme Court allows federal agents to cut razor wire Texas installed on US-Mexico border - Restoring An Invasion Route For Illegals!
Ketanji Brown Jackson: 2023-12-20 Supreme Court Justic Ketanji Brown Jackson targeted in ethics complaint over husband's income
Posted by:Besoeker

#19  Can a supreme court justice be impeached?

Section 1 of Article 3 of the Constitution says:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Can a Supreme Court justice be impeached, it happened once. Meet ‘Old Bacon Face Samuel Chase.’
Posted by: Woodrow   2024-03-19 19:01  

#18  Yes, and you have the CNN girlie who has like quintupled down now on "Christian nationalists think rights come from God, not the gummint. How scary!"

No self awareness at all.
Posted by: M. Murcek    2024-03-19 18:58  

#17  ^ "So, it's a restriction on the Government? That hardly seems fair!"
Posted by: Frank G   2024-03-19 18:48  

#16  Looks like the gotcha question about what a woman is was a smoke screen for the deeper issue. She doesn’t understand anything about the Constitution.
Posted by: Super Hose   2024-03-19 15:52  

#15  Is there anyway ...

Posted by: Skidmark   2024-03-19 13:36  

#14  Is there anyway we can take all idiots in government like this, tie them in a bag and throw them into the Potomac and drown them?
Posted by: DarthVader   2024-03-19 13:19  

#13  affirmative action, thank you LBJ. I think that anyone accepting an affirmative action benefit would afterwards feel less worthy. but thats only me and what do i know about 'worthy'.
Posted by: irish rage boy   2024-03-19 11:20  

#12  ^ You forgot to mention Boeing maintenance inpectors....or should we not go there ?
Posted by: Besoeker   2024-03-19 09:52  

#11  It basically seems law degrees are handed out like candy. And they want to do the same with medical degrees too.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2024-03-19 09:44  

#10  Diversity hire....
Posted by: Mercutio   2024-03-19 09:27  

#9  But when someone like Fani gets jiggy, is it double entendre?
Posted by: M. Murcek    2024-03-19 08:57  

#8  MM, Twice in a week. Last time I had to look it up. Definition is only in the older (paper) dictionaries.
Posted by: Cleared Cookies Lost Nic   2024-03-19 08:53  

#7  ^ Also has avoided, publicly anyway, getting jiggy with the help.
Posted by: M. Murcek    2024-03-19 08:44  

#6  In this year's Diversity Hires' Cup she's plainly ahead of Willis. Jackson was able to display her profound ignorance in complete, coherent sentences. She also avoided that zesty frisson of lying in open court in direct language, or perhaps dialect.
Posted by: Cesare   2024-03-19 08:21  

#5  White House pressure to censor social media no worse than yelling at journalists, SCOTUS suggests
Posted by: Skidmark   2024-03-19 08:13  

#4  It appears most law schools have banned the discussion of that Constitution thingy.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2024-03-19 07:40  

#3  Exactly what the framers intended the 1st amendment to do. Restrict the government from tyranny over the people.

Perhaps Ketanji should take an intro law class.
Posted by: Warthog   2024-03-19 06:01  

#2  The truth shall set you free.

Nobody said it would necessarily be to your liking...
Posted by: M. Murcek    2024-03-19 03:05  

#1  Jackson said. "So, can you help me?

Probably not.
Posted by: Besoeker   2024-03-19 01:40  

00:00